IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea21/312710.html

Resolving the Reality Gap in Farm Regulation Voting Models

Author

Listed:
  • Hopkins, Kelsey A.
  • McKendree, Melissa G. S.
  • Schaefer, K. Aleks
  • Rice, Emma D.

Abstract

In the United States, 19 state-level bills and ballot initiatives concerning farm animal welfare (FAW) have been adopted across 12 states. In this research, we seek to model the evolution of the state-level FAW regulatory landscape as a function of legislature characteristics and constituent demographics. More specifically, we utilize a two-stage model to assess (i) whether and when a given state considers FAW measures, and (ii) if so, the likelihood the measures are passed. Using our model, we estimate the likelihood of FAW adoption outcomes for all 50 states. We find that the cost to the egg and pork industries to upgrade to cage- and crate-free production methods in the states most likely to pass a FAW regulation in the future is small relative to the size of the industry. Our findings will assist producers and industry stakeholders in gauging the future of the regulatory landscape and provide guidance on whether to upgrade existing enclosures to comply with mandates on the horizon or to continue operating with “conventional” enclosures.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Hopkins, Kelsey A. & McKendree, Melissa G. S. & Schaefer, K. Aleks & Rice, Emma D., 2021. "Resolving the Reality Gap in Farm Regulation Voting Models," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 312710, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea21:312710
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.312710
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/312710/files/Abstracts_21_06_14_13_30_59_24__98_226_119_205_0.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.312710?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kaminski, Danielle M. & Caputo, Vincenzina & McKendree, Melissa G.S., . "The US Public’s Attitudes on Animal and Worker Welfare in the Dairy and Poultry Industries," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 49(01).
    2. Luke, Jaime R. & Tonsor, Glynn T., 2025. "U.S. public sentiment toward policy action targeting emissions from beef production," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    3. Lin, Lin & Ortega, David L., 2025. "Drivers of state legislative actions restricting foreign holdings of U.S. agricultural land," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    4. Albert Boaitey, 2024. "Farm animal welfare regulatory preferences and food choice: survey evidence from the US," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 12(1), pages 1-23, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy
    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aaea21:312710. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.